概念映射模型对家庭医学住院医师批判性思维能力的影响:一项随机对照试验。

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Family and Community Medicine Pub Date : 2023-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-24 DOI:10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_391_22
Mervat M S Mahmoud, Dina A Shokry, Maha A E Mowafy, Nesreen M K Elden, Marwa D A Hasan
{"title":"概念映射模型对家庭医学住院医师批判性思维能力的影响:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Mervat M S Mahmoud,&nbsp;Dina A Shokry,&nbsp;Maha A E Mowafy,&nbsp;Nesreen M K Elden,&nbsp;Marwa D A Hasan","doi":"10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_391_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The cognitive process of critical thinking (CT) involves the examination of the existing reasons and an analysis of the information to draw conclusions and make decisions. The goal of the study was to determine how concept mapping (CM) technique affects family medicine residents' capacity for critical thought.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted a randomized controlled trial among family medicine residents aged between 26 and 28 years. A total of 100 residents were involved; over the course of 3 months, 50 residents were exposed to the conventional teaching model and 50 residents to the CM model. Data was collected using California CT skills test (CCTST) modified Arabic version and a self-administered questionnaire. The primary intervention was teaching method, experimental group received CM lessons while control group had conventional lessons. First session was carried out at baseline and second session one week after baseline, whereas 3<sup>rd</sup>, 4<sup>th</sup>, and 5<sup>th</sup> sessions conducted at end of 1<sup>st</sup>, 2<sup>nd</sup>, 3rd months, respectively. Both groups were assessed at baseline and at end of 3rd month. Both groups were reassessed at end of three months. Quantitative data was presented as mean and SD, whereas frequencies and percentages used for qualitative data. Pre- and post-intervention CT scores for study groups were compared using t-test or Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. Groups were compared on pre- and post-intervention CT grades using Chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vast majority (98%) of participants were females, nearly half were 27 year old, and belonged primarily to urban areas (76%). There was no difference in the CT scores between the groups at baseline. The post-intervention CT scores for study group were statistically significantly higher (18.36±2.68) compared to control group (15.94±1.94) (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CM approach was superior to the conventional teaching approach in terms of improving CT.</p>","PeriodicalId":46862,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family and Community Medicine","volume":"30 3","pages":"225-230"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9f/63/JFCM-30-225.PMC10479024.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of concept mapping model on critical thinking skills of family medicine residents: A randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Mervat M S Mahmoud,&nbsp;Dina A Shokry,&nbsp;Maha A E Mowafy,&nbsp;Nesreen M K Elden,&nbsp;Marwa D A Hasan\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_391_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The cognitive process of critical thinking (CT) involves the examination of the existing reasons and an analysis of the information to draw conclusions and make decisions. The goal of the study was to determine how concept mapping (CM) technique affects family medicine residents' capacity for critical thought.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted a randomized controlled trial among family medicine residents aged between 26 and 28 years. A total of 100 residents were involved; over the course of 3 months, 50 residents were exposed to the conventional teaching model and 50 residents to the CM model. Data was collected using California CT skills test (CCTST) modified Arabic version and a self-administered questionnaire. The primary intervention was teaching method, experimental group received CM lessons while control group had conventional lessons. First session was carried out at baseline and second session one week after baseline, whereas 3<sup>rd</sup>, 4<sup>th</sup>, and 5<sup>th</sup> sessions conducted at end of 1<sup>st</sup>, 2<sup>nd</sup>, 3rd months, respectively. Both groups were assessed at baseline and at end of 3rd month. Both groups were reassessed at end of three months. Quantitative data was presented as mean and SD, whereas frequencies and percentages used for qualitative data. Pre- and post-intervention CT scores for study groups were compared using t-test or Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. Groups were compared on pre- and post-intervention CT grades using Chi-square test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Vast majority (98%) of participants were females, nearly half were 27 year old, and belonged primarily to urban areas (76%). There was no difference in the CT scores between the groups at baseline. The post-intervention CT scores for study group were statistically significantly higher (18.36±2.68) compared to control group (15.94±1.94) (<i>P</i> = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CM approach was superior to the conventional teaching approach in terms of improving CT.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Family and Community Medicine\",\"volume\":\"30 3\",\"pages\":\"225-230\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/9f/63/JFCM-30-225.PMC10479024.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Family and Community Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_391_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family and Community Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.jfcm_391_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:批判性思维的认知过程包括对现有原因的检查和对信息的分析,以得出结论并做出决策。本研究的目的是确定概念映射(CM)技术如何影响家庭医学住院医师的批判性思维能力。材料和方法:我们在26至28岁的家庭医学住院患者中进行了一项随机对照试验。共有100名居民参与;在3个月的时间里,50名居民接受了传统教学模式,50名住户接受了CM模式。数据采用加州CT技能测试(CCTST)修改的阿拉伯语版本和自填问卷收集。主要干预措施为教学方法,实验组采用CM课程,对照组采用常规课程。第一次治疗在基线和基线后一周的第二次治疗中进行,而第三、第四和第五次治疗分别在第一、第二、第三个月结束时进行。两组均在基线和第3个月底进行评估。两组患者在三个月结束时都进行了重新评估。定量数据以平均值和标准差表示,而频率和百分比用于定性数据。根据情况,使用t检验或Mann-Whitney U检验比较研究组干预前和干预后的CT评分。采用卡方检验对各组干预前和干预后的CT分级进行比较。结果:绝大多数(98%)参与者是女性,近一半是27岁,主要属于城市地区(76%)。在基线检查时,两组之间的CT评分没有差异。研究组干预后CT评分(18.36±2.68)明显高于对照组(15.94±1.94)(P=0.001)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effect of concept mapping model on critical thinking skills of family medicine residents: A randomized controlled trial.

Background: The cognitive process of critical thinking (CT) involves the examination of the existing reasons and an analysis of the information to draw conclusions and make decisions. The goal of the study was to determine how concept mapping (CM) technique affects family medicine residents' capacity for critical thought.

Materials and methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial among family medicine residents aged between 26 and 28 years. A total of 100 residents were involved; over the course of 3 months, 50 residents were exposed to the conventional teaching model and 50 residents to the CM model. Data was collected using California CT skills test (CCTST) modified Arabic version and a self-administered questionnaire. The primary intervention was teaching method, experimental group received CM lessons while control group had conventional lessons. First session was carried out at baseline and second session one week after baseline, whereas 3rd, 4th, and 5th sessions conducted at end of 1st, 2nd, 3rd months, respectively. Both groups were assessed at baseline and at end of 3rd month. Both groups were reassessed at end of three months. Quantitative data was presented as mean and SD, whereas frequencies and percentages used for qualitative data. Pre- and post-intervention CT scores for study groups were compared using t-test or Mann-Whitney U test, as appropriate. Groups were compared on pre- and post-intervention CT grades using Chi-square test.

Results: Vast majority (98%) of participants were females, nearly half were 27 year old, and belonged primarily to urban areas (76%). There was no difference in the CT scores between the groups at baseline. The post-intervention CT scores for study group were statistically significantly higher (18.36±2.68) compared to control group (15.94±1.94) (P = 0.001).

Conclusion: The CM approach was superior to the conventional teaching approach in terms of improving CT.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Family and Community Medicine
Journal of Family and Community Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
3.70%
发文量
20
审稿时长
37 weeks
期刊最新文献
Predictors of depression among the elderly persons with disabilities in Indonesia. Effect of concept mapping model on critical thinking skills of family medicine residents: A randomized controlled trial. Effectiveness of the use of clickers versus group discussion in learning by undergraduate medical students. Early detection system of risk factors for diabetes mellitus type 2 utilization of machine learning-random forest. Outcomes of home-isolated coronavirus disease 2019 patients in Bahrain.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1